Yes, that is why I advocate good APS-C cameras, and good EF-S lenses can be smaller, lighter, and cheaper. A 18-200mm lens on APS-C has a range equivalent to 320mm and is still very mild compared with existing 28-300L.

Yes, if you're shooting stars or other objects at or near infinity. The 18-200mm has significant focus breathing - with a subject ~30' away, the lens at 200mm gives approximately 155mm, meaning a 250mm FF-equivalent FoV. Also, the IQ of the 28-300mm on FF is substantially better than the 18-200mm on APS-C (and even so, I just sold my 28-300 because I prefer the 24-70 II + 70-300 L for even better IQ).

To summarise:14-24L16-50L35/1.445 TS/E50/1.885/1.890/2.8 TS/E135/2... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

I'd like to see one high quality prime between 16 and 20mm that is razor sharp from corner to corner when stopped down a little bit and is small and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't have to be fast, but it has to be razor sharp in the extreme corners around f8. Something like a sharper version of the Zeiss 18mm f3.5 with AF would be perfect to me.

Who wouldn't ? I'd be happy with 18mm or 21mm f5.6 and be done with it!

I'd like to see one high quality prime between 16 and 20mm that is razor sharp from corner to corner when stopped down a little bit and is small and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't have to be fast, but it has to be razor sharp in the extreme corners around f8. Something like a sharper version of the Zeiss 18mm f3.5 with AF would be perfect to me.

Who wouldn't ? I'd be happy with 18mm or 21mm f5.6 and be done with it!

Wouldn't be very good at AF with that narrow an aperture. Remember the centre AF point on the pro camera bodies and some prosumer ones becomes a diagonally cross type point at f/2.8. Then there's viewfinder brightness and the fact the f/5.6 is a bit S___ on crop and you can see why most primes and most lenses in general (and excl superteles) aren't made with narrow apertures.

I think f/2.8 is a decent compromise and you can see that trend with the 24 and 28mm IS primes. They have very good corner sharpness too.

To summarise:14-24L16-50L35/1.445 TS/E50/1.885/1.890/2.8 TS/E135/2... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

To summarise:14-24L16-50L35/1.445 TS/E50/1.885/1.890/2.8 TS/E135/2... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

I like the list above. Makes a lot of sense.

14-24 would interst np e a lot

Not mentioned is 100-400 replacement as well as long macro (180 replacement)

I would be surprised to L versions of both the 14-24 and 16-50. Latter seems like an odd focal length for an L lens.

I would be surprised to L versions of both the 14-24 and 16-50. Latter seems like an odd focal length for an L lens.

Surprised by 16-50 f/4L (~3x zoom) too. But it's a CR2 rumor and sounds like a plausible replacement to 17-40 f/4L (~2.3x zoom). If it's true, I'm in lens heaven! That's all I need when I travel with my FF camera! As long as its price stays below US$2k, I'll be the first in line.